Image ImageImage Image

Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

Moderators: HomoSapien, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10

Indomitable
RealGM
Posts: 25,458
And1: 6,407
Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Location: Yelzenbah!
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#601 » by Indomitable » Tue Jul 8, 2025 6:32 pm

Red8911 wrote:The Giddey- Coby back court is fine so is the fit. The only concern or question is mostly Coby the player especially when you have to pay him a big contract which is not an easy call to make.

Other than that there’s really no problem in terms of fit.Coby might not be a defensive specialist but he’s not completely useless either, he’s no Zach on that end. Also they both compliment each other well on offense. I don’t see why anyone would even bring this up as an issue.


Zach is better defender then Coby
:banghead:
2weekswithpay
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,394
And1: 2,535
Joined: Dec 22, 2020
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#602 » by 2weekswithpay » Tue Jul 8, 2025 6:43 pm

Red8911 wrote:The Giddey- Coby back court is fine so is the fit. The only concern or question is mostly Coby the player especially when you have to pay him a big contract which is not an easy call to make.

Other than that there’s really no problem in terms of fit.Coby might not be a defensive specialist but he’s not completely useless either, he’s no Zach on that end. Also they both compliment each other well on offense. I don’t see why anyone would even bring this up as an issue.


Coby is near the bottom at just about every defensive metric. Coby isn't much of an upgrade over Zach.
User avatar
nomorezorro
RealGM
Posts: 13,203
And1: 10,297
Joined: Jun 22, 2006
Location: bfk

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#603 » by nomorezorro » Tue Jul 8, 2025 7:16 pm

Read on Twitter


KC says he doesn't expect us to go up to $30m. encouraging
WookieOnRitalin wrote:Game 1. It's where the series is truly 0-0.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,820
And1: 18,885
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#604 » by dougthonus » Tue Jul 8, 2025 8:00 pm

DuckIII wrote:Interesting discussion. I guess if I had one point to reiterate here, its that we started the process of building around Giddey 4 months ago. Its going to take at least two more years to see what that will look like. They aren't doing it all at once, but its impossible for me to understand how someone can say that is not what is happening. Admittedly its through KC, but the Bulls have basically acknowledged that the plan is to build a team that blends with Giddey's style of play.

Does that include getting a mobile rim protecting center? Definitely. Does the absence of one today 4 months into the rebuild mean we aren't going to get one? Of course not.

And really, I don't want all these needs addressed right now. That's exactly the kind of mistake I'd expect AK to make, but he hasn't made it. I want weaknesses for a year to limit our win total. I don't want to shore up that stuff this year any more than we already have. I suspect we will to some extent, because I still expect at least one trade. But ideally we just let this new core evolve for a year without any more artificial short term "solutions."


FWIW, if your view is just that we're going to build around Giddey, I have no problem doing that, and maybe I was misinterpreting your point.

I don't think we are presently built around Giddey, and I don't think any of our decisions to date are better or worse with Giddey here than without Giddey here. Nor do I think Giddey is a good enough or meaningful enough player that we should be thinkin around building around him.

However, next season, we will have a ton of options to do all kinds of things. Coby, Ayo, Collins, Huerter, Vuc, and Carter will all be gone (or need to be reupped) and we'll have an absolute ton of cap space. We'll be able to completely change almost everything in a year.

My preferred path would be to trade anyone that can give you picks this year (outside of Noa/Matas), and just be really bad then hopefully grab a franchise player in a draft that might have three or four of them, then use all your extra picks and reup with whatever market value you guys you want around Noa, Matas, your 2026 pick, your extra picks you picked up in trade, and roll from there without trying to build a unicorn roster around a flawed player.

I get we won't do that of course, but I think more or less four the past four seasons every year I said "this is what I would do" has been something that with hindsight, I still like more than what we actually did.
User avatar
HomoSapien
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 37,316
And1: 30,349
Joined: Aug 17, 2009
 

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#605 » by HomoSapien » Tue Jul 8, 2025 8:27 pm

I still wonder if we can just get the deal done with incentives. Like, let the base salary be $25 per year and then have it go up to $30 based on performance (I.E. being named an All-Star, making the playoffs, starting a certain number of games, etc.). That way both sides feel like they've won and from our side, you don't feel bad paying him that much if he's reaching those goals.
ThreeYearPlan wrote:Bulls fans defend HomoSapien more than Rose.
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,661
And1: 37,006
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#606 » by DuckIII » Tue Jul 8, 2025 9:03 pm

dougthonus wrote:
DuckIII wrote:Interesting discussion. I guess if I had one point to reiterate here, its that we started the process of building around Giddey 4 months ago. Its going to take at least two more years to see what that will look like. They aren't doing it all at once, but its impossible for me to understand how someone can say that is not what is happening. Admittedly its through KC, but the Bulls have basically acknowledged that the plan is to build a team that blends with Giddey's style of play.

Does that include getting a mobile rim protecting center? Definitely. Does the absence of one today 4 months into the rebuild mean we aren't going to get one? Of course not.

And really, I don't want all these needs addressed right now. That's exactly the kind of mistake I'd expect AK to make, but he hasn't made it. I want weaknesses for a year to limit our win total. I don't want to shore up that stuff this year any more than we already have. I suspect we will to some extent, because I still expect at least one trade. But ideally we just let this new core evolve for a year without any more artificial short term "solutions."


FWIW, if your view is just that we're going to build around Giddey, I have no problem doing that, and maybe I was misinterpreting your point.



To be exact, what I'm saying is that the Bulls have already decided to build the team around Giddey's unique game, have already begun doing that, but it will take some time to do it fully. You were contesting that they are even doing this, which I still don't really understand. That's the sticking point on that item.

I don't think we are presently built around Giddey, and I don't think any of our decisions to date are better or worse with Giddey here than without Giddey here.


Building, not built. Correct. Whether those decisions would look good without Giddey isn't really relevant to what I was saying. Sure, I think two really tall, unusually athletic, 3/4 hybrids would be nice on any team. Its a desirable player type. But its extra great when you want to run and have one of the best passers in the NBA leading that attack.

Nor do I think Giddey is a good enough or meaningful enough player that we should be thinkin around building around him.


Not as a franchise player, but as a style of play. Nor does it appear the FO has any intention of treating him like a franchise player.

However, next season, we will have a ton of options to do all kinds of things. Coby, Ayo, Collins, Huerter, Vuc, and Carter will all be gone (or need to be reupped) and we'll have an absolute ton of cap space. We'll be able to completely change almost everything in a year.

My preferred path would be to trade anyone that can give you picks this year (outside of Noa/Matas), and just be really bad then hopefully grab a franchise player in a draft that might have three or four of them, then use all your extra picks and reup with whatever market value you guys you want around Noa, Matas, your 2026 pick, your extra picks you picked up in trade, and roll from there without trying to build a unicorn roster around a flawed player.

I get we won't do that of course, but I think more or less four the past four seasons every year I said "this is what I would do" has been something that with hindsight, I still like more than what we actually did.


Sure, if we are trying to do whatever we have to do to to contend no matter how many down years it requires, gutting this roster of basically everyone but Matas and Noah makes sense. But we aren't going to do that so I don't even worry about it anymore. I'll accept a young, athletic team that's fun to watch that has the contract flexibility to adapt.

My fury at AK's refusal to trade off assets and start over in the past was because: (a) those assets were old and/or injury prone and absolutely certain to depreciate in value during their deals; (b) had us completely locked into a core contractually; (c) that core was not even remotely close to being able to contend with zero options to correct that with a tweak here and there on the fly; and (d) we had less than even our own picks.

This is different. So I have a much different attitude about it. He might totally bugger it up again with his impatience and general idiocy, but for right now he's going about things in a much better way than he had been.
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.
jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,695
And1: 3,964
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#607 » by jnrjr79 » Tue Jul 8, 2025 9:36 pm

dougthonus wrote:
DuckIII wrote:Interesting discussion. I guess if I had one point to reiterate here, its that we started the process of building around Giddey 4 months ago. Its going to take at least two more years to see what that will look like. They aren't doing it all at once, but its impossible for me to understand how someone can say that is not what is happening. Admittedly its through KC, but the Bulls have basically acknowledged that the plan is to build a team that blends with Giddey's style of play.

Does that include getting a mobile rim protecting center? Definitely. Does the absence of one today 4 months into the rebuild mean we aren't going to get one? Of course not.

And really, I don't want all these needs addressed right now. That's exactly the kind of mistake I'd expect AK to make, but he hasn't made it. I want weaknesses for a year to limit our win total. I don't want to shore up that stuff this year any more than we already have. I suspect we will to some extent, because I still expect at least one trade. But ideally we just let this new core evolve for a year without any more artificial short term "solutions."


FWIW, if your view is just that we're going to build around Giddey, I have no problem doing that, and maybe I was misinterpreting your point.

I don't think we are presently built around Giddey, and I don't think any of our decisions to date are better or worse with Giddey here than without Giddey here. Nor do I think Giddey is a good enough or meaningful enough player that we should be thinkin around building around him.

However, next season, we will have a ton of options to do all kinds of things. Coby, Ayo, Collins, Huerter, Vuc, and Carter will all be gone (or need to be reupped) and we'll have an absolute ton of cap space. We'll be able to completely change almost everything in a year.

My preferred path would be to trade anyone that can give you picks this year (outside of Noa/Matas), and just be really bad then hopefully grab a franchise player in a draft that might have three or four of them, then use all your extra picks and reup with whatever market value you guys you want around Noa, Matas, your 2026 pick, your extra picks you picked up in trade, and roll from there without trying to build a unicorn roster around a flawed player.

I get we won't do that of course, but I think more or less four the past four seasons every year I said "this is what I would do" has been something that with hindsight, I still like more than what we actually did.


With the idea that wins and losses aren't super important next year, to what extent is there an argument that if you can sign Giddey at $25M, irrespective of your concerns, you do it, let him cook until the trade deadline, and then trade him? If Giddey put up anything like his end-of-season stats before the deadline, you'd think he'd have some pretty serious trade value. Even something splitting the difference between the beginning and end of year performances would make him a positive asset.
jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,695
And1: 3,964
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#608 » by jnrjr79 » Tue Jul 8, 2025 9:41 pm

DuckIII wrote:
Sure, if we are trying to do whatever we have to do to to contend no matter how many down years it requires, gutting this roster of basically everyone but Matas and Noah makes sense. But we aren't going to do that so I don't even worry about it anymore. I'll accept a young, athletic team that's fun to watch that has the contract flexibility to adapt.

My fury at AK's refusal to trade off assets and start over in the past was because: (a) those assets were old and/or injury prone and absolutely certain to depreciate in value during their deals; (b) had us completely locked into a core contractually; (c) that core was not even remotely close to being able to contend with zero options to correct that with a tweak here and there on the fly; and (d) we have less than even our own picks.

This is different. So I have a much different attitude about it. He might totally bugger it up again with his impatience and general idiocy, but for right now he's going about things in a much better way than he had been.


Yeah, this is the big thing for me. Say whatever you will about AK, he sucks, most of us all agree, but he has in fact pivoted. He has not pivoted in the way I would have preferred/imagined, but I have a lot more interest and long-term hope in a team that 1) is built around guys that are 18-22 and 2) has restored some future draft capital than I do with a team built around Zach, DeRozan, and Vooch, where they all have peaked and. you've hit the ceiling of what they can do.

EDIT: right after I posted this, I got an email from a season tickets rep at the Bulls trying to set a call. Guys, I'm somewhat happier about the direction now, but let's not get too over your skis, ok?
GoBlue72391
RealGM
Posts: 10,735
And1: 6,970
Joined: Oct 26, 2009
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#609 » by GoBlue72391 » Tue Jul 8, 2025 9:50 pm

Red Larrivee wrote:
dougthonus wrote:Coby is a guy that doesn't fit next to Giddey, Matas and Noa are guys I'd like the same next to Giddey or not, and neither one is a guy I feel is a perfect fit next to Giddey. As prospects, I'd want guys both to be good shooters. Matas showed good improvement, but was 29% shooter as a prospect. Both these guys are just high upside prospects.


Why doesn't Coby fit with Giddey? Their 2-man lineup was +9.7 after the break. They played together in 7 of the 25 most used lineups after the break. 5 of those lineups had a positive net rating.

Okoro is not a shooter, he got played out of the playoffs because of his inability to shoot. Teams just left him alone to double guys


Last playoffs, he made 38% of his 3s with a 3PAr of 53.3. The last two seasons he has a 3PAr of 50.7 and has made 38% of his 3s.

Teams may be logically comfortable letting him shoot, but it doesn't mean he can't make the shot. His three is significantly improved.

They're both bad defenders on a bad defensive team. I don't care what the numbers say, you're not gonna have success with a backcourt that bad on defense unless they're elite on offense, which they're not.

They don't fit. That is abundantly clear to me.
GoBlue72391
RealGM
Posts: 10,735
And1: 6,970
Joined: Oct 26, 2009
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#610 » by GoBlue72391 » Tue Jul 8, 2025 9:54 pm

Red8911 wrote:The Giddey- Coby back court is fine so is the fit. The only concern or question is mostly Coby the player especially when you have to pay him a big contract which is not an easy call to make.

Other than that there’s really no problem in terms of fit.Coby might not be a defensive specialist but he’s not completely useless either, he’s no Zach on that end. Also they both compliment each other well on offense. I don’t see why anyone would even bring this up as an issue.

I couldn't disagree more.

Giddey and Coby are such a poor fit IMO that it's an either or situation with both of them having extensions looming.

Coby is a much, much worse defender than Zach.
bullskokie
Pro Prospect
Posts: 773
And1: 336
Joined: Jun 30, 2017
 

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#611 » by bullskokie » Tue Jul 8, 2025 10:06 pm

Giddey signs QO and we sign Kuminga.
drosestruts
General Manager
Posts: 9,167
And1: 4,288
Joined: Apr 05, 2012
 

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#612 » by drosestruts » Tue Jul 8, 2025 10:12 pm

dougthonus wrote:My preferred path would be to trade anyone that can give you picks this year (outside of Noa/Matas), and just be really bad then hopefully grab a franchise player in a draft that might have three or four of them, then use all your extra picks and reup with whatever market value you guys you want around Noa, Matas, your 2026 pick, your extra picks you picked up in trade, and roll from there without trying to build a unicorn roster around a flawed player.

I get we won't do that of course, but I think more or less four the past four seasons every year I said "this is what I would do" has been something that with hindsight, I still like more than what we actually did.


Outside of Vuc and Carter our team is very young, with tons of guys who have shown recent incremental improvements:

Giddey - great post all-star break stretch
White - just posted the best efficiency of his career
Jones - elite 6:1 assist to turnover ratio, good POA defense, elite finisher at the rim
Ayo - elite finisher at the rim, despite playing with an injury, good poa defender
Zach Collins - stretch with the Bulls was the best of his career from an effeciency and the difference between ORtg and DRtg

or who are certainly still young enough to do so and/or showed more in recent past seasons:

Smith
Williams
Huerter
Phillips


Draft picks aren't these magic jellly beans where a 19-year old kid magically leap frogs the impact and play of a young veteran who's been in the NBA for 3-4 years. Most of the time you're just re-setting the clocks on the time till these players are making a positive impact.

If you can swindle some team into giving draft assets or young players for Vuc or someone be my guest

But most of our players who would have any value, I feel like we'd just be resetting the clock
meekrab
RealGM
Posts: 13,937
And1: 10,582
Joined: Dec 15, 2014

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#613 » by meekrab » Tue Jul 8, 2025 10:52 pm

bullskokie wrote:Giddey signs QO and we sign Kuminga.

Surely we've already covered all the reasons this is practically impossible to happen, S&T of Kuminga would be hard to make legal, Kuminga probably wouldn't sign for the MLE, GSW surely would match anything in that range up to likely 30 M which we can't even offer.

The Bulls are being unnecessarily tight with the purse strings here imo, Giddey getting paid the same as Quickley or Suggs is a great value deal.
boozapalooza
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,609
And1: 974
Joined: Jun 26, 2013

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#614 » by boozapalooza » Tue Jul 8, 2025 11:54 pm

nomorezorro wrote:
Read on Twitter


KC says he doesn't expect us to go up to $30m. encouraging


I’m expecting something like 3/80 for Giddey. Prob toss him a player option on a 3/75. Shorter years, allowing Giddey to hit free agency again at age 25/26 with a shot for a heavy contract if he lives up to it. Seems reasonable for both sides.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,820
And1: 18,885
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#615 » by dougthonus » Wed Jul 9, 2025 12:01 am

DuckIII wrote:To be exact, what I'm saying is that the Bulls have already decided to build the team around Giddey's unique game, have already begun doing that, but it will take some time to do it fully. You were contesting that they are even doing this, which I still don't really understand. That's the sticking point on that item.


No decisions they have made are better with or without Giddey. If we didn't have Giddey, Matas and Noa would have the same value, as would Okoro. Nor do I think those guys necessarily are optimal guys around Giddey. Fundamentally, I think building a transition oriented team is a path to failure, and that is the path you described these guys fitting next to him.

Building, not built. Correct. Whether those decisions would look good without Giddey isn't really relevant to what I was saying. Sure, I think two really tall, unusually athletic, 3/4 hybrids would be nice on any team. Its a desirable player type. But its extra great when you want to run and have one of the best passers in the NBA leading that attack.


Fundamentally if we are trying to build a running team irrespective of defense and shooting then I think that is a losing proposition. It is a gimmick squad. I think the two draft picks we have for okish with Giddey, but there is certainly no perfect fit, which makes sense given Giddeys weaknesses make it so hard, which ultimately is the core problem with making him a big money player.

Not as a franchise player, but as a style of play. Nor does it appear the FO has any intention of treating him like a franchise player.


Fundamentally if a player has such an unusual value proposition that it impacts every area of your roster building decisions then by default you are treating them like a franchise guy. You don't take a minor player and build your team to cover their problems.

Sure, if we are trying to do whatever we have to do to to contend no matter how many down years it requires, gutting this roster of basically everyone but Matas and Noah makes sense. But we aren't going to do that so I don't even worry about it anymore. I'll accept a young, athletic team that's fun to watch that has the contract flexibility to adapt.


Our roster is going to be gutted either way due to everyone being UFAs. We could trade Coby and still be top bidder next year on Coby. Really the gap in this is everything else is the same, do you want to start next year with Giddey or X cap room in place of him. For me, if X is 30m, I will take the cap room. If X is 25m, I will take Giddey. It isn't really a huge difference but we all have lines.

I am not presenting a be as bad as it takes option. I am saying if you pay Giddey and Coby market value that they aren't important vs different market value guys you can acquire next year or the year after, and getting assets and different market value guys is better than no assets and commiting to current market value guys.
User avatar
Truebiscuit
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,604
And1: 1,040
Joined: Nov 01, 2017
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#616 » by Truebiscuit » Wed Jul 9, 2025 12:16 am

dougthonus wrote:
DuckIII wrote:To be exact, what I'm saying is that the Bulls have already decided to build the team around Giddey's unique game, have already begun doing that, but it will take some time to do it fully. You were contesting that they are even doing this, which I still don't really understand. That's the sticking point on that item.


No decisions they have made are better with or without Giddey. If we didn't have Giddey, Matas and Noa would have the same value, as would Okoro. Nor do I think those guys necessarily are optimal guys around Giddey. Fundamentally, I think building a transition oriented team is a path to failure, and that is the path you described these guys fitting next to him.

Building, not built. Correct. Whether those decisions would look good without Giddey isn't really relevant to what I was saying. Sure, I think two really tall, unusually athletic, 3/4 hybrids would be nice on any team. Its a desirable player type. But its extra great when you want to run and have one of the best passers in the NBA leading that attack.


Fundamentally if we are trying to build a running team irrespective of defense and shooting then I think that is a losing proposition. It is a gimmick squad. I think the two draft picks we have for okish with Giddey, but there is certainly no perfect fit, which makes sense given Giddeys weaknesses make it so hard, which ultimately is the core problem with making him a big money player.

Not as a franchise player, but as a style of play. Nor does it appear the FO has any intention of treating him like a franchise player.


Fundamentally if a player has such an unusual value proposition that it impacts every area of your roster building decisions then by default you are treating them like a franchise guy. You don't take a minor player and build your team to cover their problems.

Sure, if we are trying to do whatever we have to do to to contend no matter how many down years it requires, gutting this roster of basically everyone but Matas and Noah makes sense. But we aren't going to do that so I don't even worry about it anymore. I'll accept a young, athletic team that's fun to watch that has the contract flexibility to adapt.


Our roster is going to be gutted either way due to everyone being UFAs. We could trade Coby and still be top bidder next year on Coby. Really the gap in this is everything else is the same, do you want to start next year with Giddey or X cap room in place of him. For me, if X is 30m, I will take the cap room. If X is 25m, I will take Giddey. It isn't really a huge difference but we all have lines.

I am not presenting a be as bad as it takes option. I am saying if you pay Giddey and Coby market value that they aren't important vs different market value guys you can acquire next year or the year after, and getting assets and different market value guys is better than no assets and commiting to current market value guys.


I'm in DuckIII's camp in that I believe AKME wants to build this team around Josh Giddey (and Matas, but that isn't the crux of the discussion).

It boils down to if you think he is ascending (he had a career year with us last season, and his production after the All-Star break was phenomenal). That gives me hope, especially considering the kid is only 22 years old...
Working on becoming Titletown:
Bears - 9
Bulls - 6
Blackhawks - 6
Cubs - 3
White Sox - nobody cares :D
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,661
And1: 37,006
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#617 » by DuckIII » Wed Jul 9, 2025 12:31 am

dougthonus wrote:
DuckIII wrote:To be exact, what I'm saying is that the Bulls have already decided to build the team around Giddey's unique game, have already begun doing that, but it will take some time to do it fully. You were contesting that they are even doing this, which I still don't really understand. That's the sticking point on that item.


No decisions they have made are better with or without Giddey. If we didn't have Giddey, Matas and Noa would have the same value, as would Okoro. Nor do I think those guys necessarily are optimal guys around Giddey. Fundamentally, I think building a transition oriented team is a path to failure, and that is the path you described these guys fitting next to him.

Building, not built. Correct. Whether those decisions would look good without Giddey isn't really relevant to what I was saying. Sure, I think two really tall, unusually athletic, 3/4 hybrids would be nice on any team. Its a desirable player type. But its extra great when you want to run and have one of the best passers in the NBA leading that attack.


Fundamentally if we are trying to build a running team irrespective of defense and shooting then I think that is a losing proposition. It is a gimmick squad. I think the two draft picks we have for okish with Giddey, but there is certainly no perfect fit, which makes sense given Giddeys weaknesses make it so hard, which ultimately is the core problem with making him a big money player.

Not as a franchise player, but as a style of play. Nor does it appear the FO has any intention of treating him like a franchise player.


Fundamentally if a player has such an unusual value proposition that it impacts every area of your roster building decisions then by default you are treating them like a franchise guy. You don't take a minor player and build your team to cover their problems.

Sure, if we are trying to do whatever we have to do to to contend no matter how many down years it requires, gutting this roster of basically everyone but Matas and Noah makes sense. But we aren't going to do that so I don't even worry about it anymore. I'll accept a young, athletic team that's fun to watch that has the contract flexibility to adapt.


Our roster is going to be gutted either way due to everyone being UFAs. We could trade Coby and still be top bidder next year on Coby. Really the gap in this is everything else is the same, do you want to start next year with Giddey or X cap room in place of him. For me, if X is 30m, I will take the cap room. If X is 25m, I will take Giddey. It isn't really a huge difference but we all have lines.

I am not presenting a be as bad as it takes option. I am saying if you pay Giddey and Coby market value that they aren't important vs different market value guys you can acquire next year or the year after, and getting assets and different market value guys is better than no assets and commiting to current market value guys.


This going to be one of those things that goes round and round because now you’re just back to points you were trying to make in the early exchange. So I’m bowing out now.

The Bulls are building a team that caters to the guy who is going to run the show. You don’t like it because you don’t like the player, okay. But that’s what is happening. The only thing that makes no sense to me about your posts is the refusal to accept that it’s happening. I don’t get that.
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.
Infinity2152
Veteran
Posts: 2,628
And1: 951
Joined: Jul 19, 2023
       

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#618 » by Infinity2152 » Wed Jul 9, 2025 12:53 am

The Bulls are not building around Giddey, lmao! They're risking alienating him for a few mill right now. Over $30 mill, a little more than half of what guys get who teams are built around. What does build around Giddey even mean? Do you prioritize shooting or athleticism? You need him to be able to pass to shooters, but you also need guys to catch oops. More bigs or smalls? You need small fast guys in transitions, but bigs are better finishers. Who have we added since Giddey's been here? Tre Jones, another PG. Noa Essensgue, a non shooter who's a bad fit with Giddey if both can't shoot consistently, who else? Okoro? We literally had no defensive wing except Pat Will, who's played PF the whole time. Huerter, bad defensively. Collins, bad shooter and not really a rim runner or super athletic.

The only thing you need to plan around Giddey imo is you need a defensive plus guard next to him. A SF who can guard POA covers that too. He can play with shooters or rim runners. Every player with a NBA job should be able to do one or the other.

Coby's an excellent offensive fit next to Giddey, and a very bad defensive fit. There are two sides to the game. You can cover it up with a defensive SF, but the problem is Coby is a sub par defender and can't guard POA. It would be the same if you were prioritizing Coby, you'd want a defensive guard next to him too. Coby's not great off ball, not a good POA defender, not catching any oops ever. If AK was all about building around Giddey, Coby is not the ideal backcourt partner. He'd be gone already, or at least on the block much harder.
MGB8
RealGM
Posts: 18,993
And1: 3,621
Joined: Jul 20, 2001
Location: Philly

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#619 » by MGB8 » Wed Jul 9, 2025 1:12 am

Infinity2152 wrote:The Bulls are not building around Giddey, lmao! They're risking alienating him for a few mill right now. Over $30 mill, a little more than half of what guys get who teams are built around. What does build around Giddey even mean? Do you prioritize shooting or athleticism? You need him to be able to pass to shooters, but you also need guys to catch oops. More bigs or smalls? You need small fast guys in transitions, but bigs are better finishers. Who have we added since Giddey's been here? Tre Jones, another PG. Noa Essensgue, a non shooter who's a bad fit with Giddey if both can't shoot consistently, who else? Okoro? We literally had no defensive wing except Pat Will, who's played PF the whole time. Huerter, bad defensively. Collins, bad shooter and not really a rim runner or super athletic.

The only thing you need to plan around Giddey imo is you need a defensive plus guard next to him. A SF who can guard POA covers that too. He can play with shooters or rim runners.

Coby's an excellent offensive fit next to Giddey, and a very bad defensive fit. There are two sides to the game. You can cover it up with a defensive SF, but the problem is Coby is a sub par defender and can't guard POA. It would be the same if you were prioritizing Coby, you'd want a defensive guard next to him too.



Nope.

Coby is a fine fit, provided that you play Giddey at the 3 defensively. AKME drafted Noa, who probably slots in as a combo forward like Matas - but Essengue isn’t close to ready. Anyway, I could see AKME having a dream of playing big, with Giddey being forced to defend on the perimeter (which will likely expose him - making him much worse on that end - but I also think AKME are effectively idiots). But that drafting of Noa and Dream of going big also fits with the leaked rumors of them being willing to part with both Coby and Ayo.

Anyway, on offense, Coby is actually a near ideal fit with Giddey - like Patty Mills in the Olympics. Gives you a 2nd ball handler and significant on or off ball 3 pt threat. Opens up lanes, safety valve / bailout, pressure valve, etc.

And Coby-Okoro-Giddey-Matas quartet, with a 3 and D center behind them, would be a very nice two way grouping. On an F to A scale, Coby is a C (and sometimes D) defender at the 1, Okoro will defend the best wing or guard and is a B+ defender at the 2, and we hope an A, Giddey is a C+ (and on occasion B-, B, even B+) defender at the 3, 3/4 (effort and matchup dependent), and Matas an incomplete but we hope ultimately any A defender at the 3/4.
jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,695
And1: 3,964
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Josh Giddey Thread 2.0 

Post#620 » by jnrjr79 » Wed Jul 9, 2025 1:33 am

MGB8 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:The Bulls are not building around Giddey, lmao! They're risking alienating him for a few mill right now. Over $30 mill, a little more than half of what guys get who teams are built around. What does build around Giddey even mean? Do you prioritize shooting or athleticism? You need him to be able to pass to shooters, but you also need guys to catch oops. More bigs or smalls? You need small fast guys in transitions, but bigs are better finishers. Who have we added since Giddey's been here? Tre Jones, another PG. Noa Essensgue, a non shooter who's a bad fit with Giddey if both can't shoot consistently, who else? Okoro? We literally had no defensive wing except Pat Will, who's played PF the whole time. Huerter, bad defensively. Collins, bad shooter and not really a rim runner or super athletic.

The only thing you need to plan around Giddey imo is you need a defensive plus guard next to him. A SF who can guard POA covers that too. He can play with shooters or rim runners.

Coby's an excellent offensive fit next to Giddey, and a very bad defensive fit. There are two sides to the game. You can cover it up with a defensive SF, but the problem is Coby is a sub par defender and can't guard POA. It would be the same if you were prioritizing Coby, you'd want a defensive guard next to him too.



Nope.

Coby is a fine fit, provided that you play Giddey at the 3 defensively. AKME drafted Noa, who probably slots in as a combo forward like Matas - but Essengue isn’t close to ready. Anyway, I could see AKME having a dream of playing big, with Giddey being forced to defend on the perimeter (which will likely expose him - making him much worse on that end - but I also think AKME are effectively idiots). But that drafting of Noa and Dream of going big also fits with the leaked rumors of them being willing to part with both Coby and Ayo.

Anyway, on offense, Coby is actually a near ideal fit with Giddey - like Patty Mills in the Olympics. Gives you a 2nd ball handler and significant on or off ball 3 pt threat. Opens up lanes, safety valve / bailout, pressure valve, etc.

And Coby-Okoro-Giddey-Matas quartet, with a 3 and D center behind them, would be a very nice two way grouping. On an F to A scale, Coby is a C (and sometimes D) defender at the 1, Okoro will defend the best wing or guard and is a B+ defender at the 2, and we hope an A, Giddey is a C+ (and on occasion B-, B, even B+) defender at the 3, 3/4 (effort and matchup dependent), and Matas an incomplete but we hope ultimately any A defender at the 3/4.


I think Coby is a fairly obvious poor fit defensively with Giddey, but I think you hit on the right point here. If you’re going to have 2 of your 3 players at 1-3 be minus defenders who get blown by, you need a rim-protecting C. Things will be exacerbated if Vooch is around (though this maybe is not the worst thing if you prioritize the draft pick next year over wins and losses).

Return to Chicago Bulls